WWYD - Possible insubordination

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it sounds like you may be micro managing him. Why do you need to tell him exactly how to manage a meeting he is facilitating? Why not trust to see that he can manage it? Why are you making minor edits on a document that three other people are seeing? You should either be having major input into the document at some stage, or not editing at all if it's just "minor." He does sound like he has an attitude problem, but it also sounds like it's not clear that you are adding any value by managing him. Which is likely why he tried to go straight to the "big boss."

well, honestly because he gets it wrong when I don't tell him. And I get in trouble when he gets it wrong.

My job is to oversee his work and that's what I'm doing. I didn't even know about the document until today when all this came about. Usually there are not minor edits - I am re-drafting significant portions of his work product. And it's not grammar or style, it's adding entire sections that are relevant that he didn't bother to include.

Regarding the agenda issue - if you knew that XYZ had to be part of all meetings and when your employee shared an agenda with you that didn't include XYZ. What would you do? Would you let your employee know? That's all I did - say "hey, just make sure XYZ is included" That's not micromanaging. Micromanaging would have changed the order of the meeting items, told employee what should be included, etc. I'm being sincere here when I say - what would you do differently to ensure he does it right?

but it also sounds like it's not clear that you are adding any value by managing him. Which is likely why he tried to go straight to the "big boss

I did smile at this comment, though, because I am sure this is exactly what he thinks. It's not true, but it's funny how you picked up on exactly what he thinks. He actually thinks there's no reason for even my boss to review or approve documents. He thinks he should be able to operate in his own bubble without having to go through any approval process.

I'm not going to argue with you on the details, but it seems pretty clear that this is an employee who appreciates more autonomy than you're giving him. He's TOLD YOU he feels micromanaged. You're the manager, so you need to figure out how to approach this situation so you can both ensure the quality of his work, and give him the space that he needs to do a good job. If you think his work product is poor, that's a whole separate issue.

it's clear that he feels micromanaged. it is appears that his work is subpar. he is not a superstar that is best left alone.

That's wasn't my point. My point is that OP is a manager, and she needs to, well, manage. She needs to figure out how to address his weakenesses and take advantage of his strengths. It appears that she hasn't done anything at all to communicate where she feels he is being inappropriate, starting with his inability to take criticism. These are all things that can be addressed, but only if she actually steps up and acts like a manager.

not every worker is manageable.

[Anonymous]

He wants your job. Fire him now before he gets it.

[Anonymous]

Agree with many of the recos above. OP, you should focus on how to manage this employee and develop clear expectations for his performance that you address with him in person and in writing. If he's been a problem I would involve HR as a neutral third party so not have a witness and not get into a pissing match with him about what was discussed. I think you need to come to the table with what you are willing to "give" on to support his need to be in control, but be very clear about your expectations for involvement and sign-off on his work as needed.

Talking this thru with HR if you have a strong lead in that area can also give you insight on what skills you need to develop to effectively manage someone like him. It might be a case of turning down the drama. Get some honest feedback from someone who has more management experience than you, at any rate, would be my best advice.

[Anonymous]

You need to be very clear with him about what you expect, and you need to follow up when he doesn't do what you asked him to do.

"Bob, yesterday, you sent BigBoss a document before I had a chance to review it. In the future, I need you to provide me with a copy for approval prior to sending it to BigBoss. Can you do that?"

"Bob, when we spoke about running the TPS reports by me before sending them to BigBoss last month, you agreed that that was something you could do. Today, you sent another report without my approval. What's going on with that?"

(I am a fan of Alison Green at AskAManager.org for supervisory advice, too.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You need to be very clear with him about what you expect, and you need to follow up when he doesn't do what you asked him to do.

"Bob, yesterday, you sent BigBoss a document before I had a chance to review it. In the future, I need you to provide me with a copy for approval prior to sending it to BigBoss. Can you do that?"

"Bob, when we spoke about running the TPS reports by me before sending them to BigBoss last month, you agreed that that was something you could do. Today, you sent another report without my approval. What's going on with that?"

(I am a fan of Alison Green at AskAManager.org for supervisory advice, too.)

Do all of this in email not verbal, and if you do need to offer verbal feedback follow with an email summarizing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to be very clear with him about what you expect, and you need to follow up when he doesn't do what you asked him to do.

"Bob, yesterday, you sent BigBoss a document before I had a chance to review it. In the future, I need you to provide me with a copy for approval prior to sending it to BigBoss. Can you do that?"

"Bob, when we spoke about running the TPS reports by me before sending them to BigBoss last month, you agreed that that was something you could do. Today, you sent another report without my approval. What's going on with that?"

(I am a fan of Alison Green at AskAManager.org for supervisory advice, too.)

Do all of this in email not verbal, and if you do need to offer verbal feedback follow with an email summarizing.

Ideally, do both verbal and follow up with an email. Email so it's documented, but face to face so he takes it seriously. I would also add in something like "Bob, when I give you feedback regarding an assignment, it's important for you to follow that feedback. I am your supervisor. A few times I've gotten the impression that you're resistant to taking direction from me. If you're going to be successful in this role, that needs to change."

[Anonymous]

Document, document, document, then PIP and send him on his way.

[Anonymous]

My colleague is in a similar situation. She is a 40s female, he is an late 20s male and thinks he is hot shit but in fact his work quality is poor, often because he fails to ask for clarificatin, follow protocol, etc. He is so intent on proving that he should run things that he makes many mistakes. In her review, she made it very clear where his defeciencies were, wrote up a suggestion plan for improvement with status check ins, etc. Basically she put him on notice. He freaked out yelled at her, etc. and demanded a meeting with HR. Where they told him that he was extremely lucky that she did not fire him, it was completely within her rights to do so, and that she had clear documentation of his poor performance and that HR supported her in whatever decision she made.

His attitude straightened up after that--though work is still mediocre. It literally did not occur to him that he could get fired. Bit of an entitlement mentality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He wants your job. Fire him now before he gets it.

+1.

the employee's behavior is classic amateur politics trying to discredit the manager.

[Anonymous]

No offense but the tasks you have mentioned OP are quite low skill, monotonous and many places would have secretaries doing expense reports, data entry, proofing, etc.

Can't you guys get into the 21st century and update your systems, automate things and cut the paper pushing?

Is the quality of work really that bad that multiple people are reviwing or editing every short document? Or is the quality of work bad because no one has ownership or any work product, it just goes in circles getting editted by paper pushers?

If this guy is from the 21st century or private sector I'd bet he is extremely frustrated by your bureaucracy and archaic processes. You guys should bring in a consultant to make process, It and systems upgrades across the board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's the situation, my employee and I have a stressed relationship. He is very cocky, acts like a know-it-all, and treats me like a colleague rather than supervisor. He gets very defensive when I correct something he's done so it's gotten to the point where I really hesitate to correct him (I'll correct factual and grammatical errors, but if its style or professional corrections, I think about it more and second guess myself).

For example, When I email him "you need to add XYZ to the agenda and coordinate with [staff] to find out what time XYZ will speak" he'll always respond with an argument or excuse or reason why he did things his way, "I'm already prepared for [staff] to come. They are coming at 10:00 and I'll just stop the discussion to talk about XYZ.

When another supervisor or boss or someone says the same thing to him, his response is always "okay, will do."

I annoys the crap out of me.

He's also made statements that his degree is more advanced than mine (it's not) and that I micromanage him too much.

Today, he sent my boss a document for review and blind copied me on it). In the email he said that 2 colleagues reviewed and edited his work and he was sending it to my boss for review approval.

My boss also forwards me the email (didn't know my employee bcc'd me on it) and asks why I didn't review it? in other words, I'm in trouble for "letting" my employee send something up the ranks that I didn't review.

A few minutes later, he sends the original email to me and adds [my boss] asked that I review it before she looks at it.

I know exactly what he was trying to do - circumvent me and deal with my boss.

Would you make this a big deal and tell him that from now on he needs to go through me before sending anything to the big boss or do you think he got the message because my boss already told him she's not reviewing unless I see it.

What's funny (sad funny) is that after I made edits to the document, he sent it back to my boss but HAD to add that I only made minor edits. I know the way his mind works and he's trying to subtly tell my boss that I didn't need to review.

I know it sounds like I'm obsessing over a little thing, but trust me when I say that this guy is VERY difficult to work with. He argues every point with me and will never just do what I ask, he tries to get away with as little work as possible and tries to "catch" me in mistakes, oversights or other things. It gets old and tiring fast.

WWYD?

No I would it make a big deal about it. He is being honest: he sent you email and said big boss wants you to review. You just tell him yes that is the procedure now and in the future.

And document this and start creating a file with Hr on him.

[Anonymous]

Is this the type of place that stifles all ideas and best practices suggestions by saying "this is how we did it in the past and it worked." Opposite if continuous improvement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it sounds like you may be micro managing him. Why do you need to tell him exactly how to manage a meeting he is facilitating? Why not trust to see that he can manage it? Why are you making minor edits on a document that three other people are seeing? You should either be having major input into the document at some stage, or not editing at all if it's just "minor." He does sound like he has an attitude problem, but it also sounds like it's not clear that you are adding any value by managing him. Which is likely why he tried to go straight to the "big boss."

well, honestly because he gets it wrong when I don't tell him. And I get in trouble when he gets it wrong.

My job is to oversee his work and that's what I'm doing. I didn't even know about the document until today when all this came about. Usually there are not minor edits - I am re-drafting significant portions of his work product. And it's not grammar or style, it's adding entire sections that are relevant that he didn't bother to include.

Regarding the agenda issue - if you knew that XYZ had to be part of all meetings and when your employee shared an agenda with you that didn't include XYZ. What would you do? Would you let your employee know? That's all I did - say "hey, just make sure XYZ is included" That's not micromanaging. Micromanaging would have changed the order of the meeting items, told employee what should be included, etc. I'm being sincere here when I say - what would you do differently to ensure he does it right?

but it also sounds like it's not clear that you are adding any value by managing him. Which is likely why he tried to go straight to the "big boss

I did smile at this comment, though, because I am sure this is exactly what he thinks. It's not true, but it's funny how you picked up on exactly what he thinks. He actually thinks there's no reason for even my boss to review or approve documents. He thinks he should be able to operate in his own bubble without having to go through any approval process.

Regarding this - there are different communication styles that work for different people. You may consider adjusting your speaking style to accommodate his ego. For example, some people respond better to a Socratic style that leads them to the answer, rather than directly telling them what to do. In this case, instead of "make sure you include XYZ on the agenda", try "Where in this agenda to you plan to have XYZ speak? Does XYZ know this, and does anyone in the audience need to know what time that will occur?". He'll either tell you how he's addressed this, or he'll realize that it needs to be added - but then it's HIS idea to add it (at least in his mind), so it's OK. "Have you already met with <staff> to discuss the details of XYZ's talk? No? Well, do you know how long of a time slot he needs, what a/v equipment he needs?". This gives him an opportunity to tell you what he has already done without feeling attacked, and gives you an opportunity to raise any areas that may not yet be addressed.

Same thing with reviewing a document. Instead of re-writing to add a section for him, ask questions about the missing content. Make him realize on his own that stuff is missing.

This won't work for everyone, and it does take more time on your part, but I have seen it work well with some very difficult employees. The problem with your current style is that "add XYZ to the agenda" sounds like a nitpicky order that he thinks he's already met the intent of, which makes him believe all of your communication falls into that category, which will lead him to getting defensive or dismissing more important topics as well. Good luck, however you decide to approach it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it sounds like you may be micro managing him. Why do you need to tell him exactly how to manage a meeting he is facilitating? Why not trust to see that he can manage it? Why are you making minor edits on a document that three other people are seeing? You should either be having major input into the document at some stage, or not editing at all if it's just "minor." He does sound like he has an attitude problem, but it also sounds like it's not clear that you are adding any value by managing him. Which is likely why he tried to go straight to the "big boss."

well, honestly because he gets it wrong when I don't tell him. And I get in trouble when he gets it wrong.

My job is to oversee his work and that's what I'm doing. I didn't even know about the document until today when all this came about. Usually there are not minor edits - I am re-drafting significant portions of his work product. And it's not grammar or style, it's adding entire sections that are relevant that he didn't bother to include.

Regarding the agenda issue - if you knew that XYZ had to be part of all meetings and when your employee shared an agenda with you that didn't include XYZ. What would you do? Would you let your employee know? That's all I did - say "hey, just make sure XYZ is included" That's not micromanaging. Micromanaging would have changed the order of the meeting items, told employee what should be included, etc. I'm being sincere here when I say - what would you do differently to ensure he does it right?

but it also sounds like it's not clear that you are adding any value by managing him. Which is likely why he tried to go straight to the "big boss

I did smile at this comment, though, because I am sure this is exactly what he thinks. It's not true, but it's funny how you picked up on exactly what he thinks. He actually thinks there's no reason for even my boss to review or approve documents. He thinks he should be able to operate in his own bubble without having to go through any approval process.

Regarding this - there are different communication styles that work for different people. You may consider adjusting your speaking style to accommodate his ego. For example, some people respond better to a Socratic style that leads them to the answer, rather than directly telling them what to do. In this case, instead of "make sure you include XYZ on the agenda", try "Where in this agenda to you plan to have XYZ speak? Does XYZ know this, and does anyone in the audience need to know what time that will occur?". He'll either tell you how he's addressed this, or he'll realize that it needs to be added - but then it's HIS idea to add it (at least in his mind), so it's OK. "Have you already met with <staff> to discuss the details of XYZ's talk? No? Well, do you know how long of a time slot he needs, what a/v equipment he needs?". This gives him an opportunity to tell you what he has already done without feeling attacked, and gives you an opportunity to raise any areas that may not yet be addressed.

Same thing with reviewing a document. Instead of re-writing to add a section for him, ask questions about the missing content. Make him realize on his own that stuff is missing.

This won't work for everyone, and it does take more time on your part, but I have seen it work well with some very difficult employees. The problem with your current style is that "add XYZ to the agenda" sounds like a nitpicky order that he thinks he's already met the intent of, which makes him believe all of your communication falls into that category, which will lead him to getting defensive or dismissing more important topics as well. Good luck, however you decide to approach it!

I can't emphasize this enough. If a major part of his job is writing documents (sounds like it is) you can't just expect to do extensive rewrites (including adding sections) and expect him to learn or be happy about it. You have to give him a chance to fix it himself, so he can learn and continue to take ownership over the document. If you're not building in enough time in the review process for this, then that's on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, it sounds like you may be micro managing him. Why do you need to tell him exactly how to manage a meeting he is facilitating? Why not trust to see that he can manage it? Why are you making minor edits on a document that three other people are seeing? You should either be having major input into the document at some stage, or not editing at all if it's just "minor." He does sound like he has an attitude problem, but it also sounds like it's not clear that you are adding any value by managing him. Which is likely why he tried to go straight to the "big boss."

agreed

I have been the employee in a similar situation, although obviously dont think I was cocky, insuboordinate etc. I had a micro managing boss who just stressed me out to no end.
I would do anything I could to try and go around her and go up the chain, to avoid dealing with the drama.
Maybe take a step back and look at yourself too OP